I love the idea of a 3-tiered system to division 1 college football--the best of the Big Sky, CAA, and MVC could definitely hang with some of the "Group of 5".

I also think absorbing the other 3 Dakota schools is a natural move for the Big Sky. The devil is in the details but I think the smart folks in that commissioner's office can figure out a way to work it out.--I love the idea of Quads for football and then either a N/S or E/W split for Olympic sports. They could even do 3 pods of 5 for Olympic sports:

I also think absorbing the other 3 Dakota schools is a natural move for the Big Sky. The devil is in the details but I think the smart folks in that commissioner's office can figure out a way to work it out.--I love the idea of Quads for football and then either a N/S or E/W split for Olympic sports. They could even do 3 pods of 5 for Olympic sports:

NorthE WashingtonPortland StIdahoMontanaMontana St

EastUNDND StUSDSD StN Colorado

SouthIdaho StWeber StS UtahN ArizonaSacramento St

I love the Quad system too. But should the Big Sky add the other 3 Dakota schools to make it 15, they need a 16th member to have an equally 4-quad 4-team system. But which of the fb-affiliates would you prefer for full membership? UC-Davis or Cal Poly? Sadly, former Big Sky member Cal St.-Northridge no longer sponsors the sports after leaving the conference to join the Big West (which at the time started to drop football). And here's an interesting format under the quad system (at least for some sports like basketball):

But to New Mexico St., I believe they would be a great addition for non-football sports, with basketball being improved. Plus, the closest travel partners for the Aggies would be Northern Arizona, Northern Colorado and Southern Utah.

I love the Quad system too. But should the Big Sky add the other 3 Dakota schools to make it 15, they need a 16th member to have an equally 4-quad 4-team system. But which of the fb-affiliates would you prefer for full membership? UC-Davis or Cal Poly? Sadly, former Big Sky member Cal St.-Northridge no longer sponsors the sports after leaving the conference to join the Big West (which at the time started to drop football). And here's an interesting format under the quad system (at least for some sports like basketball):

But to New Mexico St., I believe they would be a great addition for non-football sports, with basketball being improved. Plus, the closest travel partners for the Aggies would be Northern Arizona, Northern Colorado and Southern Utah.

When I came up with that scheme back in May my thought was that the 3 pods of 5 for Olympic sports was a tenable arrangement and then for football Idaho would continue playing FBS ball in the Sunbelt thus making the football quads:

If Idaho wants to play FCS in the Big Sky it probably necessitates taking a 16th member (NMSU?) or jettisoning the Dakota project.

Like I've said before, I think the Big Sky is a conference that could actually benefit from losing members. Letting Sacramento St go to the Big West and getting UND into the Summit/MVFC would really help consolidate the league.

Like I've said before, I think the Big Sky is a conference that could actually benefit from losing members. Letting Sacramento St go to the Big West and getting UND into the Summit/MVFC would really help consolidate the league.

If Sacramento State joins the Big West, will it be like UC-Davis and Cal Poly in terms of fb-only members? But I do agree on the part of North Dakota joining the Summit (all-sports) & MVFC (football) would help out the league (at least for baseball too).

Despite the optimism expressed in the article, the last two games had announced attendance under 5,000. It's a crowded marketplace with UO and OSU down the road. The stadium lease is up for renewal soon and the Portland Timbers whisper about replacing the turf with grass, knowing that won't happen if PSU football is still there.

Since Idaho will re-join next season to bring the non-football sports to 12 members, how about having Cal Poly-SLO and UC Davis joining the Big Sky as full members, to balance the sides with 14? For instance, here's a sample:

Since Idaho will re-join next season to bring the non-football sports to 12 members, how about having Cal Poly-SLO and UC Davis joining the Big Sky as full members, to balance the sides with 14? For instance, here's a sample:

P.S.: Which is the better non-FBS Western-based D-I conference (excluding the WAC)? The non-football Big West or the FCS Big Sky? Just for "step-by-step ladder effect" purposes.

It makes sense but the issue is your last question.

Neither conference is that great, as far as the conference latter goes they'd be pretty much side by side.

If you want to be techincal, the Big Sky has lost members to both the Big West and WCC (Gonzaga/CS-Northridge), and the WCC and Big Sky each lost 1 member to each other (Pacific/UCSB) so the Big Sky would be lower than both if you look at it that way.

Looking at it realistically, the WCC seems to be the best conference after the P12/MW, they have good basketball with Gonzaga, St Mary's, Pepperdine, Loyola Marymount, and BYU but they are all private schools so Davis/Poly likely wouldn't really be interested.

The Big Sky would seems to be better than the Big West as they have football and schools from multiple states, however (even for UC-Davis) no school in the Big Sky is closer than the furthest school is in the BW from NoCal to SoCal (omitting Hawaii). Also other than football (which the BW doesn't compete in) and basketball (which neither are really great bb conferences), the Big West is better at most other sports like track, volleyball, softball and the Big Sky doesn't sponsor many sports that have great support in the Big West like men's soccer, men's golf, and baseball. Add in the great academics in the Big West and it more than makes up for any perceived stigma for not sponsoring football IMO.

PAC12 (Big FBS state schools+Stanford/USC)- (all below would move up if offered)MWC (smaller FBS state schools)- (any fb schools below minus BYU and maybe Hawii would move up if offered)WCC (non fb private schools + BYU)Big West (non fb Cali state schools +Hawaii, UC Davis, Cal Poly)Big Sky (FCS small state schools not in Cali + Sac St, Idaho) - (Cal Poly/UC-Davis could go Big Sky, Sac St could go Big West, FBS teams could leave for FBS league)WAC (anyone in the Mnt/Pac time zone not in one of the above but all want out)Seattle/Denver/GCU-WCC (though GCU's chance are slim to none)CSUB-Big WestNMSU (anywhere, goal is MWC, but would take SBC all sport, CUSA, SLC, or Big Sky if could keep FBS fb or if it dropped down to FCS)Utah Valley (should add football and join the Big Sky, as there is really no place for them outside of the WAC)

_________________Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

Since Idaho will re-join next season to bring the non-football sports to 12 members, how about having Cal Poly-SLO and UC Davis joining the Big Sky as full members, to balance the sides with 14? For instance, here's a sample:

P.S.: Which is the better non-FBS Western-based D-I conference (excluding the WAC)? The non-football Big West or the FCS Big Sky? Just for "step-by-step ladder effect" purposes.

It makes sense but the issue is your last question.

Neither conference is that great, as far as the conference latter goes they'd be pretty much side by side.

If you want to be techincal, the Big Sky has lost members to both the Big West and WCC (Gonzaga/CS-Northridge), and the WCC and Big Sky each lost 1 member to each other (Pacific/UCSB) so the Big Sky would be lower than both if you look at it that way.

Looking at it realistically, the WCC seems to be the best conference after the P12/MW, they have good basketball with Gonzaga, St Mary's, Pepperdine, Loyola Marymount, and BYU but they are all private schools so Davis/Poly likely wouldn't really be interested.

The Big Sky would seems to be better than the Big West as they have football and schools from multiple states, however (even for UC-Davis) no school in the Big Sky is closer than the furthest school is in the BW from NoCal to SoCal (omitting Hawaii). Also other than football (which the BW doesn't compete in) and basketball (which neither are really great bb conferences), the Big West is better at most other sports like track, volleyball, softball and the Big Sky doesn't sponsor many sports that have great support in the Big West like men's soccer, men's golf, and baseball. Add in the great academics in the Big West and it more than makes up for any perceived stigma for not sponsoring football IMO.

PAC12 (Big FBS state schools+Stanford/USC)- (all below would move up if offered)MWC (smaller FBS state schools)- (any fb schools below minus BYU and maybe Hawii would move up if offered)WCC (non fb private schools + BYU)Big West (non fb Cali state schools +Hawaii, UC Davis, Cal Poly)Big Sky (FCS small state schools not in Cali + Sac St, Idaho) - (Cal Poly/UC-Davis could go Big Sky, Sac St could go Big West, FBS teams could leave for FBS league)WAC (anyone in the Mnt/Pac time zone not in one of the above but all want out)Seattle/Denver/GCU-WCC (though GCU's chance are slim to none)CSUB-Big WestNMSU (anywhere, goal is MWC, but would take SBC all sport, CUSA, SLC, or Big Sky if could keep FBS fb or if it dropped down to FCS)Utah Valley (should add football and join the Big Sky, as there is really no place for them outside of the WAC)

My apologies if my last question didn't make any sense. I was trying to prove a point, when it comes to conference realignment. No disrespect, but because I'm simply not a fan of football-only affiliates. That should be settled for other sports except basketball. In my understanding, to be an all-sports member for a particular conference or as an Independent, the most-spekked (or specified) sports are basketball and football.

My apologies if my last question didn't make any sense. I was trying to prove a point, when it comes to conference realignment. No disrespect, but because I'm simply not a fan of football-only affiliates. That should be settled for other sports except basketball. In my understanding, to be an all-sports member for a particular conference or as an Independent, the most-spekked (or specified) sports are basketball and football.

You're question was fine, I simply explained which conference were better/higher on the latter.

Between the WCC/BigWest/BigSky its not an easy answer.

I understand you are not a fan of football only affiliates, but they happen.

For Hawii to join the MWC as a full member it increases the travel cost for both Hawaii (who now instead of flying to LAX/SFO has to fly to more remote locations at a higher expense) and the MWC (who would have to send all their non-revneue sports from Wyoming/Colorado/Utah/Idaho to Hawaii at a larger expense). While I understand its distasteful, you have to recognize that both Hawaii and the MWC save money and time with this arrange and both receive exactly what they want, Hawaii wants to play big boy football and keep overhead low for non-revenue sports (basketball is a non-revenue sport for Hawaii FYI) the MWC gets Hawaii's great fb and bowl game, and the Big West gets another good acadmeic school to associate with and also now has a unique travel destination to reward their athletes who otherwise are simply in a state-wide bus league.

For UC-Davis/Cal Poly to join the Big Sky as a full members, its the same as above except the Big Sky most likely WANTS those schools but they don't want them. The Big Sky had the power say no to any fb-onlys and UC-Davis/Cal Poly would have been independents after the Great West fb collapsed, but they decided that having them in the conference (even as fb onlys) was worth it. Maybe they are trying to allow them to get comfortable and then threaten to kick them out if they don't join as full members however that's their call.

Still as far as football only members are concerned everyone involved is getting exactly what they want except the Big Sky who decide they would rather have fb-only memberships from Davis/Poly than nothing at all. So while I understand the idea that everyone should play all sports in a fb conference, when you tell them that it increases their cost w/o increasing their revenue, it not really a convincing argument.

_________________Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

@tkalmus - I can see your explanation. But thanks for trying to understand what I was trying to say or discuss. Now that you mention it that the Big Sky is a Western U.S. regional conference, I still believe that North Dakota should not be in the Big Sky for a very long time, because they're in the Upper Midwest, like far away from their conference foes. I hope by after the university find a suitable nickname to replace their former well-traditional one within the Fighting Sioux as of 2015-16, hopefully they would consider to join the Summit for most of their sports (including baseball) and the MVFC for football. Because in my opinion still, the Dakota schools must meet up at least once annually in terms of rivalries. And then, there should be a special cup or trophy for the Dakotas only to prove which of the 4 is the best between the 2 Dakota states (whether for football or basketball or any other sport alike).

Cal Poly and UC Davis will never leave all their like schools(CSUs UCs) that are a low travel bus league for the Big Sky unless forced even then, they'd just go Indy in fb. Part of the deal to add them as fb only was that Sac St. wouldn't leave for the Big West.

I don't see NMSU heading to the Big Sky. Their goal is the SunBelt...so, why would they downgrade to the BSC?I feel NMSU has more going for themselves as a whole...over Idaho. So, I don't see them dropping back quite so contently.NMSU has these attributes: fb stadium with recent upgrades, great bb, adjacent to great recruiting, near many Texas fb schools for scheduling, relevant recent past(mostly in bb), history with UTEP and UNM.

I could even see them going Indy for a few years for fb. They could easily count on their traditional games with UTEP and UNM to take up spots, plus BYU and Army are always looking for a game, and they have already lined up games with Minnesota and SDSU.If they put in some effort to lock up their OOC schedule, now. They could make transitioning to Indy much easier for the future.

I don't see NMSU heading to the Big Sky. Their goal is the SunBelt...so, why would they downgrade to the BSC?I feel NMSU has more going for themselves as a whole...over Idaho. So, I don't see them dropping back quite so contently.NMSU has these attributes: fb stadium with recent upgrades, great bb, adjacent to great recruiting, near many Texas fb schools for scheduling, relevant recent past(mostly in bb), history with UTEP and UNM.

I could even see them going Indy for a few years for fb. They could easily count on their traditional games with UTEP and UNM to take up spots, plus BYU and Army are always looking for a game, and they have already lined up games with Minnesota and SDSU.If they put in some effort to lock up their OOC schedule, now. They could make transitioning to Indy much easier for the future.

So, I just don't see the Big Sky grabbing both Idaho and NMSU.

I think we can almost count on Idaho being kicked out of the Sunbelt when their 4 year deal is up. I think most of the old line and newcomer programs find the trips to Moscow to be asinine. Karl Benson helped them out to assuage his own guilt for his failures as WAC commissioner but now its time for the SBC to build itself as a regional league, not a halfway house for college football's destitute. Big Sky football would be a good move for the Vandals. FBS independence is not sustainable when your home field seats 16,000. No one wants to go out there.

NMSU is a different case. I think that there are elements of the SBC who want them as full members and NMSU is hoping that those powers prevail an can get them full membership or at least sustain its football affiliate status. I'm a little surprised that the Big Sky has a sudden interest in the Aggies. I was under the impression that it was the Big Sky who was the disinterested party since Las Cruces is a little out of the way for their footprint. NMSU does bring a stellar mid-major basketball program so perhaps that is the main draw. If the Sunbelt does boot the Aggies I think they could sustain being an independent. If UTEP and New Mexico are still willing to play them then that's 2 games. Establish a long tern series with UMass (let's call it the independence Bowl...er wait Shreveport hosts that already)--that makes 3. BYU would be willing to give them 2 for 1s so that's 4. You can count on at least 2 rent-a-victim games among the big boys. If they can get a few MWC teams and C-USA/SBC/AAC West teams to fill the rest then they could sustain the program.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum